So says Northern Sky Research in its latest satellite market report, which estimates that the global MSS aeronautical segment (covering commercial, general, and military aircraft) will generate over $2.6 billion in total retail revenues from 2010 to 2020.

However, we are all aware that connectivity is still a cost centre for numerous parties, including airlines, though it is increasingly becoming the cost of doing business for major carriers. Hell, no-one has “ever” made money in this business, I’m told by multiple parties all the time, including, ironically (or truthfully?), one firm that has its fingers in the business of connectivity.

I wonder if we’ll be able to make the same sweeping generalization in a few years, however. Perhaps it would be better to be a company that sells connectivity hardware rather than a service provider with revenue dependent on usage levels to cover the cost of the service. And, if connectivity is going to be a business for hardware sellers/IFE providers, then it would seem that the likes of EMS, Panasonic, Thales, Qest, TECOM, Rockwell Collins and others are sitting pretty, as airlines all over the world look to bring connectivity systems aboard their aircraft.

But what about the connectivity service providers – the Gogos, Row 44s, OnAirs of this world?

Last year Gogo said it was increasingly confident that an initial public offering (IPO) of shares was in its future. And it’s not hard to imagine Row 44 working towards a similar goal (though I still wonder if Southwest Airlines might ultimately step in as acquirer). Equally, it isn’t out of the question that Gogo and Row 44 might be looking for buyers.

While OnAir has won A LOT of business with airlines (underline, underline), it has not yet broken into the US market like rival Panasonic has just done with the United-Continental deal.

Might OnAir consider some form of merger or acquisition to gain a foothold in the US? Oh, don’t mind me. You know I love a little intrigue and speculation. But I’ll never forget walking in on a consultation between Row 44 and former OnAir chief Benoit Debains at the Aircraft Interiors Expo in Hamburg a couple years back. DeBains later admitted that the Airbus/SITA joint venture was open to partnerships with Ku providers, such as Row 44. Of course, that was before Imarsat announced its plan to offer a superfast Ka-band connectivity service from 2014.

Meanwhile, it seems that Row 44′s prediction to me at APEX that some 200 Southwest 737s will be fitted with the connectivity system by year-end was a little on the rosy side. Southwest tells me that 105 737-700s are fitted with the system – less than one fifth of its fleet – and it estimates the figure “will be well over 100″ by year-end. Southwest still maintains that its entire fleet will be equipped by early 2013.

Asked about the seemingly slow pace of installs, Southwest said: “We have a number of maintenance schedules to keep up with and Wi-Fi is just one of them. It’s more the schedule of maintenance than a specific Row 44 issue.”

And who is covering the cost of installs? Southwest says it doesn’t divulge details of it’s agreement with Row 44. But you can be sure that SOMEBODY is paying for the hardware, which means SOMEBODY is making money from connectivity. Sorry, I don’t mean to yell.

]]>http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/11/somebody-is-making-money-on-in/feed/0UPDATE 1: Pricing for SwiftBroadband in-flight connectivity revealedhttp://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/10/pricing-for-swiftbroadband-in/
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/10/pricing-for-swiftbroadband-in/#commentsWed, 26 Oct 2011 13:38:01 +0000http://runway-girl.flightglobal.derek.rbi-blogs-dev.rmgc.russellsharpe.com/?p=768UPDATED to include the following comment from an industry source (which, in short, means the cost to airlines is far less). “The real cost for airlines is a lot different – unsurprisingly since a) there is no existing revenue to undermine and b) the volumes are drastically different. The current offer to key airlines (like Singapore) is to match the price of Ku with SBB if they commit to staying with Inmarsat through the transition to GX. That means an effective price of $0.20-$0.30 per Mbyte, not multiple dollars per Mbyte. Not clear how they will price for cellular services, but the key is to make a data-only service available at a realistic flat rate.”

I haven’t even called Inmarsat exec Lars Ringertz about this blog and I can already hear him telling me: “Mary, those are not the prices that Inmarsat charges its partners. We don’t control our partners’ pricing.” Except Lars would say it more eloquently than that, and with that lovely accent of his.

Of course, Lars – or the Lars in my head – is right. But it’s also true to say that the new pricing we’re seeing for SwiftBroadband-supported in-flight connectivity services are reflective of Inmarsat’s decision to dramatically reduce the cost of SwiftBroadband.

The result is that Wi-Fi via SwiftBroadband, whether for commercial or corporate aircraft, is becoming more attractive to some operators. OnAir, the Airbus/SITA joint venture, is far and away the leader in this space, with a customer list for SwiftBroadband-based connectivity that includes Emirates, Singapore Airlines, TAM and many others.

Finally, ARINC has brought a SwiftBroadband-based Wi-Fi offering to market, and has been talking to Panasonic about potential pairings (think Panasonic IFE with ARINC Wi-Fi).

So, with all that said, I invite you to watch the following video, ‘Pricing for Swiftbroadband connectivity revealed’. The figures quoted pertain to corporate aviators, most particularly the Satcom Direct service that will be provided Honeywell on its Dassault Falcon 900EX, but you get the picture.

]]>http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/10/pricing-for-swiftbroadband-in/feed/0Row 44 talks LUV installs, hybrid solutions & real-time credit!http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/10/row-44-talks-luv-installs-hybr/
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/10/row-44-talks-luv-installs-hybr/#commentsThu, 20 Oct 2011 16:51:48 +0000http://runway-girl.flightglobal.derek.rbi-blogs-dev.rmgc.russellsharpe.com/?p=811The company that used to be SO difficult for me to nail down, Row 44, is now ready to talk…a lot! I recently sat down with Row 44′s chief commercial officer Howard Lefkowitz, who proceeded to drop the following super-juicy newsy nuggets of love:

1) Some 200 Boeing 737s in Southwest Airlines’ fleet are expected to be fitted with Row 44′s Ku-band in-flight Internet solution by the end of this year, and Row 44 expects to have most of the installs done by the end of next year.

2) Row 44 is “talking to folks about some hybrid solutions where there is a little bit of overhead, a little bit of Wi-Fi, a little bit of their own device and so forth. Some, which have seat-backs, and how to do that kind of thing, so a little bit of this and a little bit of that.”

3) A total of 40 Norwegian 737s are expected to be fitted with Row 44 by the end of this year. The company is in talks with other European carriers to bring its solution on board their aircraft.

4) Real-time credit card transactions on Row 44-fitted aircraft are around the corner!

I was never very good at logic. In fact I received a “D” in the subject in college. I had better things to do at 8am, like sleep off a hangover or watch my boyfriend sleep off a hangover or drink coffee at Eat n’ Park before going to sleep. (Oh for a tiny taste of those halcyon days).

My illogical mind makes me either completely unsuited for writing about in-flight entertainment and connectivity OR perfectly suited for covering this often madcap business, which is my roundabout way of bringing you to the topic at hand – the ARINC 791 standard. What the holy hell is that, Mary, err, Runway, and why should I care?

ARINC 791 defines a K-band satellite data airborne terminal unit, and it’s the spec that’s followed for current Ku-band-supported in-flight connectivity systems. Boeing, for example, has started line-fitting its 777s with Ku, so it is punching holes in its aircraft in the fashion described in the graphic above.

However, when Inmarsat announced plans to offer a global Ka-band service, dubbed Global Xpress, the London-based satellite giant also promised that Ka antennas could be as small as iPads, which would require a decidedly different spec. Rockwell Collins, which won the exclusive deal to lead the development, production and distribution of user terminals for Global Xpress, has some busy days ahead (they beat out the likes of Thales and Panasonic).

But with an increasing array – ahem – of choices, what should airlines do? Should they fit their aircraft with Ku (and the provisions that come along with that) now, or should they wait for those wee iPad-sized antennas?

Here is what some of the leading industry dudes say about the matter:

Gary Hebb, vice president of strategy, EMS Aviation

“The reality is that airframe manufacturers will probably want to reuse the radome shapes and sizes that already exist for Ku, and there’s little sense in putting a small antenna into a large radome, so yes, Ka antennas will tend to be the same size as Ku.

“However, Ka can support smaller antennas.

“For the same size antenna, Ka has higher gain than Ku. This means that it has a narrower, more focused beam. This narrower beam will interfere less with adjacent satellites. So, you can meet the discrimination spec with a smaller Ka-band antenna.

“It comes as a surprise to many that the higher gain of a given size Ka-band antenna is exactly offset by a higher path loss for Ka-band as it travels from the satellite to the antenna. So, for a given amount of power from the satellite, you receive the same amount of power in a Ka band antenna as you would in a Ku-band antenna of the same size. While this might seem to eliminate the advantage of Ka-band, two other factors increase the bandwidth that you can cost-effectively support in a Ka-band antenna:

“Ka-band satellites have spot beams, which focus the power more effectively on each user terminal;

“Ka-band has more spectrum available, and the spot beams multiply the spectrum by allowing “reuse” of frequencies.

“So, if you want to keep the same radome shape as for Ku-band, Ka-band can support higher data rates at a lower cost per bit. If you are willing to change the radome shape, you can support the same data rates, still meet the discrimination requirement and probably still get lower cost per bit, with a smaller antenna.”

Leo Mondale, managing director of Inmarsat’s Global Xpress

“The variable here is a certified unit, and the easiest way to bring new technology to market. So, will there be a 791 standard Ka band piece of equipment that fits under the radome designed originally for Ku? Yes.

“The Ku radome needs to be redesigned and re-certified in some cases.

“When doing a retrofit, you may not choose to do 791 and in that way, you’re not constrained by a pre-agreed envelope and in that case we have a trade.

“We believe for the same sized terminal, we’ll get significantly higher throughput for that terminal. We can do comparable throughput to a smaller terminal.

“I think you’ll see both solutions really. For retrofit I think a lot of people may prefer the smaller footprint but Airbus’ perspective isdriven in many ways by new aircraft, like the A350 and Boeing has thesame considerations, so I think you’ll see a mix, even a smallerterminal sitting under a larger radome.”

It is merely a coincidence that the ‘DL’ in my headline – slang for ‘down low’, yee older fogies – is also Delta’s IATA symbol.

(Graphic above taken from a presentation made by DDDi’s Peter Lemme at the March 2010 APEX single focus workshop.)

]]>http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/10/the-dl-on-the-791-yo/feed/0Stirring things up…http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/10/stirring-things-up/
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/10/stirring-things-up/#commentsMon, 03 Oct 2011 10:56:50 +0000http://runway-girl.flightglobal.derek.rbi-blogs-dev.rmgc.russellsharpe.com/?p=881I’ve just returned from a whirlwind trip to Rome, where I was honored to have the opportunity to speak about one of my favorite topics – in-flight connectivity – at the ERA General Assembly (you can find my full presentation via this link).

As you can imagine, intra-European regional operators are not exactly chomping at the bit to add satellite-supported connectivity systems to their regional jets and turboprops at a starting cost of $500,000 (no, I’m not talking about your price tag, Iridium OpenPort).

But European regionals’ reluctance to retrofit underscores the need for airframers to offer connectivity as a linefit option. Airbus is the furthest along in this regard, as it offers L-band SwiftBroadband linefit on Airbus types, including the A320 family. Boeing is understood to be poised to do the same for the 737 (and for the 787 in 2012), and the US airframer recently confirmed it will offer Panasonic’s Ku-band system on its 777s .

Pertinent to the ERA crowd, however, Bombardier and Sukhoi have said connectivity is in their sights, and I’m hopeful after last week that ATR is giving it some thought as well.

Of course, in-flight connectivity is already shaking up the embedded in-flight entertainment space. But so too are new wireless IFE and seat-centric solutions. Indeed, a number of new offerings are giving the big dogs like Thales and Panasonic a run for their money.

I’d imagine that the prevalence of clunky, legacy, server-based IFE systems and shabby interiors – as seen here on my US Airways flight to Rome – help IFE newcomers make a case to would-be airline customers (even though Thales and Panasonic now offer some terrific-looking new integrated IFE/seat systems).

One carrier making the switch to a new IFE hardware provider (but keeping Recaro as its seat supplier) is Virgin America. A standard bearer in the IFE space, the San Francisco-based carrier announced last month at the APEX conference and exhibition in Seattle that it has chosen Lufthansa Systems as its partner in offering a hybrid ‘BoardConnect’ IFE and connectivity system – wireless plus seat-centric – to passengers.

The carrier also explained why it has moved away from its traditional Red platform, which was developed by Panasonic and CoKinetic. And yes, the carrier is even considering replacing currently-installed Red systems with the new solution.

Check out my videotaped interview below, and take note of what Lufthansa Systems says about seeking offerability for its system on Airbus A320 family aircraft, the type operated by Virgin America. Because just as connectivity gets a heck of a lot easier/less expensive when offered linefit, so too does IFE.

]]>http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/10/stirring-things-up/feed/0Thales wows with futuristic in-flight entertainmenthttp://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/09/thales-wows-with-futuristic-in/
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/2011/09/thales-wows-with-futuristic-in/#commentsThu, 15 Sep 2011 00:00:59 +0000http://runway-girl.flightglobal.derek.rbi-blogs-dev.rmgc.russellsharpe.com/?p=918I saw a lot of amazing technology on the floor of the APEX show this week, and I’ll roll out news, blogs and video of it all in the coming days and weeks here on RWG and on the Flightglobal IFEC/interiors channel. But my late day interview with Thales, captured on my iPhone, really wowed me. Thales is looking seriously at offering this solution for premium cabins.